Pynchon's negative thoughts on GR

[Richard Ryan]

If one reads GR as a sort of "novelized" late sixties pop horror movie
the notions of historical and scientific rigor (and the attendant
critical questions that standards of scientific and historic rigor
would impose on the reader) go out the window.  The possibility that
the author himself might encourage just such a defenestration make it
all the more attractive.  GR - perhaps like all Pynchon novels - is a
dreamscape where the usual principles of historical and scientific
practice get put into a very psychedelic blender.

On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Michael Bailey
<michael.lee.bailey at gmail.com> wrote:
>> wasn't it in the letter to the Dude?
>>
>
> which I can't find online now, but there was a thread on this list
> about it a couple years ago.  The full text was made available
> somewhere at the time. I believe it sold at auction for a hefty price.
>  In it he expresses disagreement with the notion that GR is
> historically or scientifically rigorous.
>
> Dave Monroe probably remembers.
>
> I don't think Pynchon actually says anything to deny that it is a
> fantastically great novel, just that people are giving him credit for
> a hypertrophied science bone (or words to that effect) when his
> outstanding parts are the artistic ones (which he doesn't actually
> say, but I read it in his non-denial of that charge)
> I said something like the above back then, but not nearly so succinctly.
>
>



-- 
Richard Ryan
New York and the World
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The remedy for unpredictability, for the chaotic uncertainty
of the future, is contained in the faculty to make and keep promises.
    -- Hannah Arendt